Mr. Hormel was no more qualified than Mr. Fox, being only a political asset and ally. An honorific or a sop, depending. But he was prevented from this bauble of renown for an entirely innocent condition, his sexuality. Mr. Clinton’s decent gesture in appointing him was wholly deserved, he merited no rebuke or rejection. He was badly treated for no fault of his own, and Mr Clinton’s gesture may have made him more whole.
As for Mr. Fox and the “swifties”….oy, don’t get me started.
Exactly what is the harm in being gay, ivylass? It’s not as if he had given money to support a group of liars who were trying to throw a U.S. Presidential election. One of these things is not like the other.
You know, I think that Fox got the job rather cheaply. $150,000? That doesn’t have to come from aristocracy.
Sometimes, the people with the money don’t have as much party loyalty as you might think. I knew a farmer back in the 1950s who used to give $10,000 to both the Democrats and the Republicans. I don’t know if it was to individual candidates, to the parties or to groups of candidates, but he certainly saw to it that everyone was happy with him.
IIRC, Bush hasn’t vetoed any bill at all yet, outright or through a pocket veto.
I read in college that the newly-appointed British ambassador to the U.S. in the 1910s was told a joke at a Washington party: “When President Wilson proposed to his girlfriend, she was so surprised she fell out of bed.” This was racy stuff, at the time. When it got back to Wilson, by then married, he icily refused to receive the ambassador. The British finally recalled him.
The West Wing once had a nice scene with President Bartlet receiving the new Swedish ambassador, IIRC, and jokingly complaining about the Vikings’ historic depredations. After quick presentation of credentials and a photo op, and the new ambassador was out the Oval Office door.
Thanks, Squink. But no Bush pocket vetoes yet?
I laughed. Thanks.
You’re welcome. I just noticed I said the ambassador “was told” the joke, but he was the one telling it, which is why Wilson held it against him.
I noticed that, too, but since all your other posts have been so good, so clear and error free, I knew “was told” was a simple oversight.
I’m not blowing smoke.
You’re too kind - thanks! 